Kristie Sue attacks survivor of Florida mass murder

We can’t remember the last time we checked in on Kristie Sue Costa—probably shortly after her Facebook homage page to child abusers Abraham Christie and Ella Draper was blocked in the UK.

Since then, we’d heard that she’d fallen head-first into the bottomless “Q Anon” pit, and frankly, we were neither surprised nor sad to see her go.

Yesterday, though, we discovered that while Kristie Sue—whose mantra is “Believe the Children!” (except when they admit they’d been forced to lie)—is still chasing the QAnon chimera, she’s branched out a bit.

Now, it seems that she has followed the baying mob of American alt-right conspiranoid trolls, and has begun happily attacking the teenagers who’ve been standing up for their right not to be murdered while they attend school.

Here she is chiding 17-year-old David Hogg, a student who survived the massacre of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting on February 14, 2018, and has become a gun control advocate and an activist against gun violence:

Kris Costa to David Hogg 1In typical Kristie Sue fashion, it never occurs to her to check her facts before spouting off: last week was spring break for Florida high school students. We see her sooper-dooper detectiving skillz are as good as ever.

Kris Costa to David Hogg 2Chris G., you’re a man after our own heart: “I’m assuming (@B_lieveChildren)’s twitter handle is ironic?” And Harem Conspiracy gets second place for his comment about the “nanny brigade”. Kris Costa to David Hogg 3Kris Costa to David Hogg 4And here’s Kristie Sue, sanctimoniously failing to fact-check once more. She demands to know why the brother of slain student Meadow Pollack “wasn’t allowed to speak” at the Washington anti-gun rally last week, and must be informed that the event was heavily planned and timed, as there was a huge roster of speakers which had to be accommodated in a limited time. Duh.

But why is Kristie Sue heroising one student and demonising another?

Simple: Meadow’s father Andy has been on a mission to improve school safety—his aim is to put more armed guards in schools and to make it harder for young adults and some with mental illness to buy guns.

But unlike David Hogg and the millions of Americans who demonstrated last week in favour of stricter gun control laws, Mr Pollack isn’t saying anything which could be interpreted as infringing upon Kristie Sue’s right to carry her firearm of choice, whenever and wherever she pleases. [Horrifying thought, need a lie-down now—Ed.]

Meanwhile, here’s Kristie Sue again, advocating a boycott of Hulu (an American subscription video-on-demand service) because they “caved” to those who objected to Fox host Laura Ingraham’s taunting David on Twitter: “David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it”, she wrote.

Kris Costa to David Hogg 5Ms Ingraham later apologised for the tweet, after David posted the names of 12 companies which advertised on her show, and several stated they would withdraw their adverts.

So it looks like once again, Kristie Sue’s rabid hypocrisy has come to the fore: she only wants what’s best for all children (unless they happen to advocate a political position with which she disagrees).

She passionately believes every word that was forced out of RD’s children’s mouths…until they started talking about how they’d been forced to make false allegations. She is filled with compassion for a student who died in the Parkland murders…but attacks a survivor of that shooting for suggesting that he might like to attend school without fearing for his life.

Same as it ever was, eh, Kristie Sue?How Kristie Sue sees herself

30 thoughts on “Kristie Sue attacks survivor of Florida mass murder

  1. Seems like young Mr. Hogg should be informed that Krusty Poo is acting admin for the banned in the UK fb page “Believe the Children” and the reasons why the page is banned…..although he and friends dealt with her crazy well enough they might derive some comfort from knowing that their instincts are correct, that she’s a known nutjob full of evil intent who strives on causing mischief.

    Whilst APD is awful, even completely horrific and just dreadful, I always feel that with K. Poo the strong stench of evil emanates from her every word….there’s a ‘blackness’ about her, like she’s an emotionless empty vessel with no end to her lack of humanity.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Krusty Poo is also the last person who should have a gun. I would keep her away from sharp knives and scissors too.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I recently watched an episode of “Inside No. 9” called “The Trial of Elizabeth Gadge” – Reece Shearsmith and Steve Pemberton are amazing writers and actors!

    Watching the episode I was struck by how real and true to life their retelling of certain absurdities as pertaining to the experiences forced upon the innocents of the Hampstead Hoax are even though their inspiration laid elsewhere.

    As for Krusty….I did happen to have a look at her stupid page sometime last week, purely to report her uploaded videos etc. and came across her ‘notes’ part of Believe the Children where she was bemoaning the loss of ‘Cassie’ – who I imagined was a Catherine Tate pisstake of a gormless gombeen, this time a trippy dippy contemporary version of a hippy flowergirl who’s nails are perfectly manicured and hair straightened for all its worth….anyway, it seemed there was no option to report that note.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Yes, several of them have taken to using the ‘notes’ as there doesnt seem to be a way of reporting them unfortunately (not that the normal reporting options are much better, at best I seem to get about a 1 in 20 success rate at reporting posts. Some days are better than others and sometimes reporting the same denied post several times over the period of a week seems to finally trigger a takedown

    Liked by 1 person

  5. She was great craic! I might think it’s a shame she’s done a runner but really she’s best off out of this sordid business…so good on her for turning her back to it all, if she has.

    I’ll continue to find her malapropisms and off key singing hilariously funny….was she also guilty of spoonerisms – because that would be brilliant…

    Meanwhile I’m finding Sacha Stone too funny for words -great skit! The guys behind “Spinal Tap” would surely delight in his desperate faux rock’n’rolla style persona and the crazy way he has of being so ‘lyrical’ when expressing his hoity-toity thoughts on the stupidity of us mere plebs. My excuse for my lack of awareness and inability to become an enlightened conscious being your honour is cos I grew up on this earth under an asphalt prophylactic…..don’t blame me…blame my forebears whose fertility is as much a surprise to me as it is to you – Lawd ‘ave mercy!

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I thought the last series of that was a work of utter genius. The episode about the two comedians had me welling up, the ghost story one was seriously creepy and the murder mystery one was mind-scramblingly clever.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. @Eliza

    The Cassie in question is KSC’s fellow conspiraloon Cassie Crowhurst, who impressed Kristie Sue with her ability to film herself listening to a John Wedger interview on a tape recorder and tutting all the way through.

    EC covered her here:

    https://hoaxteadresearch.wordpress.com/2017/12/10/late-arrival-to-team-troofer-receives-mediocre-reviews

    And some of her rants are preserved here, along with evidence of her ‘phenomenal’ musical talents:

    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Wi0mITIueCOVuaeGUUjY60RDwVU41jXL

    Liked by 2 people

  8. @Krisite Sue Costa

    So let me get this straight…

    Hulu (defending a teenager who’s been bullied and harassed for advocating gun control) – bad

    Voat (where you have several accounts and post regularly despite the fact that it frequently promotes child pornography) – good

    Have I got that right?

    Liked by 3 people

  9. 41:10 – “We do have evidence that there is a secret Luciferian cult going on within this criminal consciousness, their fictitious god, their lord of darkness.”

    Nice little mini-hissy fit at 42:50, btw.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. 44:17 – “I don’t attack people. I don’t resort to outright nastiness against people.”

    Like

  11. Are we on the same page Tinribs re “Inside No. 9”?

    I was so humbled by their beautiful exploration of what impending death upon the person who’s death stares them in the face might physically constitute….the marvellous actress Sheridan Smith played that role – it wasn’t impending death, her character was already dead but she was going through the motions of accepting her death.

    For me catching that episode was very cathartic, it helped me understand and come to terms so much with my grief. My friend died as a result of a brain tumour – it took many operations and bouts of invasive chemotherapy before she succumbed to the inevitable….what’s not important is her death but her struggle to survive and how much of an inspiration she is…..during the worst of her personal experience, that impossible knowledge that she would shortly die i used to have the nightmare that I was in her position…faced with death and separation from loved ones..my beloved children and I’d wake up choking for breath, palpitations, a heartbeat out of whack, an immense fear …..an overwhelming fear of the unknown….I thought I might be dying too.

    Those men, Pemberton and Shearsmith, thank you with all of my heart!

    Liked by 2 people

  12. I think we’re on the same page, yes. I was just agreeing with you and adding that I enjoyed the most recent series:

    The Sheridan Smith episode must have been from a previous series and I don’t think I’ve seen that one. I’ll have to see if I can find it and have a watch.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. As I recall, it was Kristie Sue being a raving Trump-loving conservative that led to Deborah Mahmoudieh falling out with her.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Btw, she is not into conspiracy theories anymore, therefore I will leave it up to EC whether her new name should be posted or not. She is just doing her silly lives these days. Gooooooood morninggggggggg!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. A day or two ago, I posted a comment about my having recent discussion about the history of RAD (reflex anal dilation test) with an elderly MD. That gentleman claimed to have been a participant in the use of RAD, or something very similar, as an entrapment ploy – for inciting suspected homosexuals serving in the US Navy to validate that suspicion, by confessing their past or current involvement in acts of anal sodomy. This doctor told myself and some friends that he could manipulate the “results” of the exam, so that it would appear to either validate or invalidate allegations, by how the subject was positioned. Therefore, he didn’t consider RAD exam to be valid “medical proof” of past or current anal sexual intercourse. The subject couldn’t know this, however, and when confronted with the SUGGESTION that an exam he had undergone generated “irrefutable medical evidence” against him, genuine homosexually active subjects generally would confess and confirm. THAT, in his opinion, was the only value and the true purpose of the RAD exam.

    There is a very interesting and very involved discussion about RAD, in a free download pdf titled: “Resisting a diagnostic technique: the case of reflex anal dilatation” by Alan Collins, Gavin Kendall and Mike
    Michael. They appear to document the use of RAD or something very similar, as a means of “identifying homosexuals”, as far back as the late 1880’s:

    It [RAD exam] has been known for some time as an indicator of homosexual acts, with a whole spate of publications in the 1950s and 1960s referring to it, as we shall discuss below. However, it is worth pointing out
    that these reported observations were exclusively clinical, and we can find no evidence of scientific attempts to evaluate its validity or reliability until around the time of Cleveland.
    The technique seems to have developed from a series of procedures in forensic pathology and forensic medicine, dating from about a hundred years ago, which stress the importance of the examination of the anus
    where there is suspicion of homosexual acts. Polson et al. (1985: 488) cite work by Ambroise Tardieu (1819–1879) on anal signs of sodomy, including the significance of ‘a widely gaping anal canal’; Tardieu’s work is confirmed with amplification by Brouardel (1909). The importance of anal signs is unquestioned in the medico-legal literature, and when reflex anal dilatation becomes a standard forensic technique, it is as an unproblematic clinical sign”.

    No scientific attempts to evaluate its validity or reliability, and yet “unquestioned” and “an unproblematic clinical sign”. Hmm…

    “In diagnosing homosexuality, reflex anal dilatation was only one of a battery of objective scientific techniques which aimed unequivocally to provide evidence of ‘unnatural practices’, to make the homosexual visible. Reflex anal dilatation could be used as a sign in cases of alleged homosexual rape, but, importantly, it could also be used in attempts to secure convictions where no complaint had been made by any of the parties involved – for example, in cases in the armed forces”.

    So it was used in “the armed forces” – not as evidence for anal rape, but “attempts to secure convictions where no complaint had been made”. Attempts to secure CONFESSIONS, on the basis of suspicion?
    There is a later discussion, proposing reasons why “professional expertise” – the opinion of the RAD examiner – was unquestioned, all of which seem quite logical.
    I’m intrigued, however, by another possibility – one which is not raised or considered. There would be no need for scientific evaluation of RAD validity, and no need to ever question it’s validity, or the assumed expertise of the examiners, if those who were employing it to “identify homosexuals” understood that RAD’s primary purpose was to scare exam subjects into making frank confessions.

    And I’m even more intrigued by statements in the original Hobbs & Wynn studies, 1987 and 1989, promoting the use of RAD – specifically – as a means of identifying sexually abused children and securing convictions where no complaint had been made (!) , such as:
    “In 27 children disclosure of abuse by the child or perpetrator (most commonly the father) was recorded” and
    in another batch of children referred for medical examination under suspicion of abuse (or social worker’s intuitive deductions?), less than 40% of “disclosures” were made by a child and almost 60% were made by a presumed perpetrator. So…are these perpetrator disclosures, confessions? Is this why Hobbs & Wynn chose to apply what had been “a means of identifying homosexuals” for 100 years, to child sexual abuse? Because they anticipated a similar dynamic – that a meaningless “medical exam” presented to suspected perpetrators as “irrefutable medical evidence” of their guilt would elicit large scale confessions, and most importantly confessions from perps who couldn’t realistically be convicted on the basis of REAL forensic evidence in their case?

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Yes, the only time I’ve ever seen her shamed into doing the right thing was when she password protected that disgusting post as a result of our critique. However, in general she is a self-righteous, hypocritical bitch. And I don’t use that word lightly.

    Like

Comments are closed.